Hi Jason,
Yes,I think this question makes more sense because the internal API Gateway
will evolve towards a sidecar approach which we'd like to promote.
Thanks,
Huabing
Original Mail
Sender: <[email protected]>;
To: zhaohuabing10201488;
CC: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
Date: 2017/11/30 03:22
Subject: Re:[onap-discuss] [ptls] Please complete Beijing Software
ArchitectureSurvey
Huabing,
Thanks for your input and for being the first to complete the survey!
If I understand your comments, *all* projects by default are using MSB through
the service registration. Would the question be more clear to ask if they are
using the internal API Gateway?
By the way, the service mesh approach sounds great.
Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM
Phone: 314-749-7422
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @DJHunt
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Date: 11/29/2017 03:26 AM
Subject: Re:[onap-discuss] [ptls] Please complete Beijing Software
ArchitectureSurvey
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jason,
Thank you for the great effort and it's really helpful to reach our Beijing
release goal!
I just want to clarify the question " Do you use MSB?" in the Survey because it
may be confusing for the ptls.
As I presented at this week's Arch call, one of the most important design
principles of MSB is providing Microservice Infrastructure which is transparent
to the applications. So the projects can leverage the capability of MSB with
minimum cost. It’s crucial because ONAP projects are polyglot and using
different lib/framework.
For registration:
In Amsterdam release, MSB integrated with both OOM and heat template to
automatically register service endpoints for all the microservices of ONAP
project.
For service communication:
The Internal API Gateway can handle the inter-service communication details
including service discovery and load balancing without modification on the
application side.
For Beijing and going forward, MSB will be continually evolving to support
Carrier Grade Microservice Architecture for ONAP with Service Mesh.
Thanks,
Huabing
Original Mail
Sender: <[email protected]>;
To: <[email protected]>;
CC: <[email protected]>;
Date: 2017/11/28 06:51
Subject: [onap-discuss] [ptls] Please complete Beijing Software
ArchitectureSurvey
_______________________________________________
onap-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
Hi PTLs,
With the Beijing focus on platform maturity (S3P/Carrier Grade) and software
architecture, the architecture subcommittee would like to gather some
information from the projects about the technology used, maturity evaluation, &
skills. We have created a survey at:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/X9F6HK6
Please complete this survey by next Wednesday Dec. 6th, so that we can
consolidate the information for our Santa Clara meeting.
If you have questions or would prefer to discuss in a call, please let me know.
Also, if some of the information requested is available in your documentation,
please just provide a pointer in the survey.
THANK YOU!
Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM
Phone: 314-749-7422
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @DJHunt
_______________________________________________
onap-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
